Socialism Is Bad for the Environment

[GoodTidings]

Yes, and reflects just over 1.6% None of those numbers are good. It's one thing to say that the GDP grew fast under Obama and it did. But Obama never got above an annual GDP of 2% So growing from really low numbers to end up at numbers that are still low, isn't something to be proud of. And it doesn't match the much higher annual GDP we are experiencing under Trump.

 

[GoodTidings]

The Severity of the Great Recession

Kevin J. Lansing of the San Francisco Fed offer some graphs that illustrate the severity of the Great Recession: one compares the decline in real household consumption per person in the 2007-2009 recession to the recessions of 2001 and 1990-91; another compares the decline in real household net worth per person in these three recessions.

Lansing offers an additional figure worth contemplating: the change in the employment/population ratio since 1988. The unemployment rate has some well-known difficulties as a measure of the employment situation: for example, "discouraged" workers who have given up looking for jobs are not counted as officially unemployed, but rather as out of the labor force.

But the employment/population ratio is just based on dividing two numbers--employment and population. The shaded areas in the figure show periods of recession, when the employment/population ratio does tend to fall.

But the decline in the employment/population ratio in this recession is enormous: 5.2 percentage points over four and a half years: from 63.4% in December 2006 to 58.2% in June 2011. Back in the grim double-dip recession of the early 1980's, for comparison, the employment/population ratio fell 3 percentage points over a bit more than three years, from 60.1% in December 1979 to 57.1% in March 1983.

These enormous declines in consumption and in asset values and the loss of jobs, of course, help to explain why the economic "recovery" is sometimes being called the Long Slump. The pattern also offers some background as to why the federal budget talks seem so intractable: when a recession dents the economy this badly, passions are going to run high.

View attachment 2923 View attachment 2924 View attachment 2925

Bush was a Liberal. Bush was not a conservative. You have to differentiate between Conservative and "Republican." Many Republicans caucus with Democrats. Bush was as big a failure economically as Obama.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Yes, and reflects just over 1.6% None of those numbers are good. It's one thing to say that the GDP grew fast under Obama and it did. But Obama never got above an annual GDP of 2% So growing from really low numbers to end up at numbers that are still low, isn't something to be proud of. And it doesn't match the much higher annual GDP we are experiencing under Trump.

It is when you fight off a depression.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Bush was a Liberal. Bush was not a conservative. You have to differentiate between Conservative and "Republican." Many Republicans caucus with Democrats. Bush was as big a failure economically as Obama.

I agree that Bush was a big failure.

 

[GoodTidings]

It is when you fight off a depression.

No, he exacerbated the recession. Simply going from really low, bad numbers, to higher, but still bad numbers isn't a good thing. It is a failure. Obama failed. His socialist liberal policies failed.

And Trump is dismantling the Obama presidency piece by piece. That is why we have record low unemployment and explosive job growth that Obama said could not happen. They could not happen under his failed policies, but his polices are becoming nothing but a distant memory.

 

[FollowTheWay]

No, he exacerbated the recession. Simply going from really low, bad numbers, to higher, but still bad numbers isn't a good thing. It is a failure. Obama failed. His socialist liberal policies failed.

And Trump is dismantling the Obama presidency piece by piece. That is why we have record low unemployment and explosive job growth that Obama said could not happen. They could not happen under his failed policies, but his polices are becoming nothing but a distant memory.

The chart goes up. Is that good or bad?

 

[GoodTidings]

The chart goes up. Is that good or bad?

The chart only shows him with better bad numbers.

It's like saying that -10 F is warmer than -100F. You still don't get any heat from it. It's like saying that a D- is better than an F. Still a really bad, failing grade.

Obama's numbers didn't improve anything, though they got up to about 1.6% on average. That is still really, really bad.

 

[InTheLight]

The chart goes up. Is that good or bad?

Compared to EVERYONE else's recovery, it's bad.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Compared to EVERYONE else's recovery, it's bad.

View attachment 2926

View attachment 2927

The Great Recession
Why this is the worst recession, not a depression - Mar. 25, 2009

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Is this the worst economy since the Great Depression? And what are the chances of the economy falling into another depression?
The answer to the first question is fairly clear. In most ways that matter to economists and average Americans, this is the worst economic crisis since the Depression.
The answer to the second question is not as clear. While the National Bureau of Economic Research officially declares the beginning and end of recessions, nobody does that for depressions.
Still, the general consensus of economists is that another depression is not likely. But the risks are greater than they were only a few months ago.

.Why this recession is so bad
First things first: Even though it may seem obvious to most that this is the worst downturn since the Great Depression, the economy has experienced other serious recessions in the past, particularly in the mid-1970s and early 1980s.

But this recession dwarfs those two for several reasons.

In terms of length, the longest post-Depression economic decline was 16 months, which occurred in both the 1973-75 and 1981-82 recessions. This recession began in December 2007, which means that it will enter its 17th month next Wednesday.
The current recession is also more widespread than any other since the Depression. The Federal Reserve's readings show that 86% of industries have cut back production since November, the most widespread reduction in the 42 years the Fed has tracked this figure.
What's more, every state reported an increase in unemployment this past December, the first time that has happened in the 32 years that records for unemployment in each state have been kept.
"This is important because there's nowhere you can move to find a job," said Gus Faucher, director of macroeconomics for Moody's Economy.com.
Finally, during the past nine months, the drop in household wealth has been larger since anything on record in the post-World War II period.

 

[InTheLight]

The Great Recession
Why this is the worst recession, not a depression - Mar. 25, 2009

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Is this the worst economy since the Great Depression? And what are the chances of the economy falling into another depression?
The answer to the first question is fairly clear. In most ways that matter to economists and average Americans, this is the worst economic crisis since the Depression.
The answer to the second question is not as clear. While the National Bureau of Economic Research officially declares the beginning and end of recessions, nobody does that for depressions.
Still, the general consensus of economists is that another depression is not likely. But the risks are greater than they were only a few months ago.

.Why this recession is so bad
First things first: Even though it may seem obvious to most that this is the worst downturn since the Great Depression, the economy has experienced other serious recessions in the past, particularly in the mid-1970s and early 1980s.

But this recession dwarfs those two for several reasons.

In terms of length, the longest post-Depression economic decline was 16 months, which occurred in both the 1973-75 and 1981-82 recessions. This recession began in December 2007, which means that it will enter its 17th month next Wednesday.
The current recession is also more widespread than any other since the Depression. The Federal Reserve's readings show that 86% of industries have cut back production since November, the most widespread reduction in the 42 years the Fed has tracked this figure.
What's more, every state reported an increase in unemployment this past December, the first time that has happened in the 32 years that records for unemployment in each state have been kept.
"This is important because there's nowhere you can move to find a job," said Gus Faucher, director of macroeconomics for Moody's Economy.com.
Finally, during the past nine months, the drop in household wealth has been larger since anything on record in the post-World War II period.

The recession of 1981-1982 was worse than the 2008-2009 recession, despite your cherry-picking of data. All I have to say is the unemployment rate was much worse in the early 80's and it was more severe because more households back then only had one bread winner as women were not as prominent in the workplace as they are now. And who can forget the crippling interest rates which were in the teens. I remember some guys at work talking about getting a home mortage at 14%.

You can post articles about the severity of the 2008-2009 recession all day long, but the fact is the Obama recovery was slow and weak compared to all other recoveries, including Reagan's who had a worse economy to overcome and was hamstrung by the Fed tightening the money supply. Contrast 18%, 19% and 20% interest rates in 1982 to 0.5% interest rates that Obama had.

Also, when you claim that the 2008-2009 was worse than any other because it lasted longer, that's just more ammo for Obama's recovery was weak and slow.

 

[GoodTidings]

The Great Recession
Why this is the worst recession, not a depression - Mar. 25, 2009

You can go back to ancient history all you want. But Obama did not improve the economy by any objective, reasonable standard. His policies didn't work and only increased unemployment to 17% Trump has reduced unemployment to between 3%-4%. Liberal policies simply don't work. Obama was a miserable failure in the economy and the numbers prove it.

 

[FollowTheWay]

The recession of 1981-1982 was worse than the 2008-2009 recession, despite your cherry-picking of data. All I have to say is the unemployment rate was much worse in the early 80's and it was more severe because more households back then only had one bread winner as women were not as prominent in the workplace as they are now. And who can forget the crippling interest rates which were in the teens. I remember some guys at work talking about getting a home mortage at 14%.

You can post articles about the severity of the 2008-2009 recession all day long, but the fact is the Obama recovery was slow and weak compared to all other recoveries, including Reagan's who had a worse economy to overcome and was hamstrung by the Fed tightening the money supply. Contrast 18%, 19% and 20% interest rates in 1982 to 0.5% interest rates that Obama had.

Also, when you claim that the 2008-2009 was worse than any other because it lasted longer, that's just more ammo for Obama's recovery was weak and slow.

No it wasn't. Show me an analysis that proves that.

 

[FollowTheWay]

You can go back to ancient history all you want. But Obama did not improve the economy by any objective, reasonable standard. His policies didn't work and only increased unemployment to 17% Trump has reduced unemployment to between 3%-4%. Liberal policies simply don't work. Obama was a miserable failure in the economy and the numbers prove it.

Republican fake news.

 

[InTheLight]

No it wasn't. Show me an analysis that proves that.

Show you an analysis?

Unemployment rate peaked under Reagan at 10.8% (when the percentage of workers per household was less than today).
Interest rates peaked at 21%.

Unemployment rate peaked at 9.7% under Obama. Interest rates were extremely low.

You present these two factoids to "prove" 2008-2009 was worse--86% of industries have cut back production in the four months prior to March 2009 and every state reported an increase in unemployment in December 2008. These are gross numbers that don't take into account the severity of the problem.

For example, "every state reported an increase in unemployment". So what? How bad was it? Supposing four high population states like California, New York, Texas, and Florida reported unemployment increases while ten low population states like Wyoming, Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, etc. report an increase in unemployment. Which is worse? Not the unemployment picture in those ten low population states. This is why RATES and PERCENTAGES mean more than raw numbers when comparing two things.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Show you an analysis?

Unemployment rate peaked under Reagan at 10.8% (when the percentage of workers per household was less than today).
Interest rates peaked at 21%.

Unemployment rate peaked at 9.7% under Obama. Interest rates were extremely low.

You present these two factoids to "prove" 2008-2009 was worse--86% of industries have cut back production in the four months prior to March 2009 and every state reported an increase in unemployment in December 2008. These are gross numbers that don't take into account the severity of the problem.

For example, "every state reported an increase in unemployment". So what? How bad was it? Supposing four high population states like California, New York, Texas, and Florida reported unemployment increases while ten low population states like Wyoming, Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, etc. report an increase in unemployment. Which is worse? Not the unemployment picture in those ten low population states. This is why RATES and PERCENTAGES mean more than raw numbers when comparing two things.

I'll take CNN-Money's analysis over yours. I'm sure I can find others.

 

[GoodTidings]

Republican fake news.

No, it wasn't fake news. Just last year, the Democrats were claiming that Obama was the one to credit for the economy being good and unemployment being at record lows. But now you are denying that none of those things that Obama was supposed to get credit for, actually happened and now you are calling good economic numbers "fake news."

So was it fake news in 2018, when Obama was taking credit for the good numbers? Was Obama just spreading Republican fake news about those good economic numbers?

 

[GoodTidings]

I'll take CNN-Money's analysis over yours. I'm sure I can find others.

Yeah, the Communist News Network, that has the lowest ratings in cable news. The channel that lied and lied and lied about the Dossier and Collusion. Trust a bunch of liars and traitors. That's the Liberal way.

 

[InTheLight]

I'll take CNN-Money's analysis over yours. I'm sure I can find others.

It's not hard to see that 10.8% unemployment is worse than 9.7%. Don't need an analysis.

In the CNN "analysis", the number of states that report unemployment increases does not report the severity of the problem. It does show it is affecting the whole nation. Which is worse? Unemployment going up 0.5% in California or unemployment going up 0.5% in Wyoming, Idaho, Rhode Island, Alaska, and Hawaii? How many people are being affected? How many businesses? Answer: it would be much worse in California.

 

[FollowTheWay]

Chart Book: The Legacy of the Great Recession
Great Recession’s Jobs Deficit Much Deeper Than in Previous Recessions
Job losses in the Great Recession were huge, and it took much longer than in previous recessions simply to get back to the level of payroll employment at the start of the recession. Employers did not begin to add jobs until 2010. Progress erasing the jobs deficit was slow for some time, but by mid-2014 the economy had recovered the 8.7 million jobs lost between the start of the recession in December 2007 and early 2010 and continued to add jobs thereafter. Job creation greater than what was required to keep up with potential labor force growth (the pace of job creation that’s appropriate once the economy is back to full health) continued to bring people back into the labor force and lower the unemployment rate. Nonfarm payroll employment was 6.6 percent (9.2 million jobs) higher in December 2017 than it was at the start of the recession.

 

[FollowTheWay]

No, it wasn't fake news. Just last year, the Democrats were claiming that Obama was the one to credit for the economy being good and unemployment being at record lows. But now you are denying that none of those things that Obama was supposed to get credit for, actually happened and now you are calling good economic numbers "fake news."

So was it fake news in 2018, when Obama was taking credit for the good numbers? Was Obama just spreading Republican fake news about those good economic numbers?

DUH. They did happen. He prevented a DEPRESSION.